Take the Limbaugh Challenge

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The thread isn't about Barry. Its about Rush.

It ain't about Spitzer or Bush either, but you were happy to take them on. Barry is much more relevant. He is an addict, and he is president. Rush is an addict and he is not president. Which man's view of the world affects your future more?

Its definitely strange why Obama must be injected into a discussion about Rush Limbaugh.

I have no problem with someone using drugs, but that doesn't mean I should overlook someone whose words are in direct opposition to their actions.

Spitzer's reputation as an anti-corruption crusader was destroyed by his dalliance with prostitutes.

Unlike Spitzer Rush's career doesn't rely on his reputation and he has the luxury that there is no expectation that he be held to account for his words Vs. his actions. If nothing else Rush's behaviour Vs. his position on the drug issue certainly makes him a blow-hard.

But then that's probably no revelation to a lot of people.

Spitzer is irrelevant to this discussion.

Any person can choose to listen to Rush or not to listen to Rush.

Few have the luxury of ignoring Barry. He is the champion of the libs, and Rush is a conservative icon. If you attack a prominent conservative as ahypocrite, just because, why find it "strange" that a prominent liberal not get the same treatment?

That line of argument would do Ann Coulter proud - disingenuous evasion via the assumption that criticism of a specific individual (in a thread about that individual, mind you) is an attack on an organized group of people and an entire ideology.

Is this thread about Ann Coulter now?

Apparently its about whatever *you* want to talk about.

I just know smoke when I see it.

And I know bullshit when I smell it.

You're full of it.

Ad homineums already? You ran out your relevancy faster than I thought you would.

Well you lost relevance as soon as you posted, but who's keeping score.

Your particular brand of bait and switch is as stale as month old bread. Time to buy some fresh.

Edited April 1, 2009 by Private Pike

[Sofiyya 1,687]

The thread isn't about Barry. Its about Rush.

It ain't about Spitzer or Bush either, but you were happy to take them on. Barry is much more relevant. He is an addict, and he is president. Rush is an addict and he is not president. Which man's view of the world affects your future more?

Its definitely strange why Obama must be injected into a discussion about Rush Limbaugh.

I have no problem with someone using drugs, but that doesn't mean I should overlook someone whose words are in direct opposition to their actions.

Spitzer's reputation as an anti-corruption crusader was destroyed by his dalliance with prostitutes.

Unlike Spitzer Rush's career doesn't rely on his reputation and he has the luxury that there is no expectation that he be held to account for his words Vs. his actions. If nothing else Rush's behaviour Vs. his position on the drug issue certainly makes him a blow-hard.

But then that's probably no revelation to a lot of people.

Spitzer is irrelevant to this discussion.

Any person can choose to listen to Rush or not to listen to Rush.

Few have the luxury of ignoring Barry. He is the champion of the libs, and Rush is a conservative icon. If you attack a prominent conservative as ahypocrite, just because, why find it "strange" that a prominent liberal not get the same treatment?

That line of argument would do Ann Coulter proud - disingenuous evasion via the assumption that criticism of a specific individual (in a thread about that individual, mind you) is an attack on an organized group of people and an entire ideology.

Is this thread about Ann Coulter now?

Apparently its about whatever *you* want to talk about.

I just know smoke when I see it.

And I know bullshit when I smell it.

You're full of it.

Ad homineums already? You ran out your relevancy faster than I thought you would.

Well you lost relevance as soon as you posted, but who's keeping score.

Your particular brand of bait and switch is as stale as month old bread. Time to buy some fresh.

You can't deal with what I posted, that's why you quickly resorted to personal attacks. Don't strain yourself continuing to insult me. I'm not wasting any more time on you unless you can do better than that.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The thread isn't about Barry. Its about Rush.

That's where to end the discussion with VW. She doesn't really want to talk about Rush. She wants to talk about her crush, Obama.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I can deal with it, I just don't buy it.

A poster made a perfectly reasonable criticism of Limbaugh's credibility based on his words and his past behaviour.

Your only response to that is to bring in Obama and make wholesale assumptions about her (and other people's views on drug use) as if this is indicative of individual hypocrisy.

I'm not wasting any more time on you unless you can do better than that.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I'm not wasting any more time on you unless you can do better than that.

Good. I hope you are learning that it's futile to even engage some of the Right Wing Nuts on this site. They don't really want to argue and they couldn't if they tried. If this were debate class, she'd have to take summer school.

[Peikko 1,575]

Oh, fabulous, VW is practicing being humerous again. I like a good laugh.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I can deal with it, I just don't buy it.

A poster made a perfectly reasonable criticism of Limbaugh's credibility based on his words and his past behaviour.

Your only response to that is to bring in Obama and make wholesale assumptions about her (and other people's views on drug use) as if this is indicative of individual hypocrisy.

I'm not wasting any more time on you unless you can do better than that.

I brought up Barry because he is an addict, too, but mentioning it doesn't get the kind of favorable mockery for him as it does for Rush. It's undeniably more important that we have a lib druggie as president. I'm sure you enjoyed our last druggie president. The preference to discuss Rush's hypocrisy rather than Barry's strikes me as odd, since Rush can't tax you, fire your CEO or have any influence over Congressional legislation.

It just seems to me that if drug abuse, not the topic of this thread any more than Barry is, is important enough to hijack a thread that simply suggests liberals are too cowardly to listen to conservative talk radio, than an already off track discussion can accomodate rational discourse re Barry's drug abuse, too.

Or, is Rush more important than Barry?

Edited April 1, 2009 by Barza Woman

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The thread isn't about Barry. Its about Rush.

That's where to end the discussion with VW. She doesn't really want to talk about Rush. She wants to talk about her crush, Obama.

Agreed - its quite blatant actually.

I have no problem with anyone using recreational drugs, or having some sort of past substance abuse / addiction problem in their past.

The problem with Rush is that he was going off on angry diatribes about the evils of drug use (for years) all the while being addicted himself (for years). Comparisons to Eliot Spitzer are quite reasonable I think in that respect.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Your only response to that is to bring in Obama and make wholesale assumptions about her (and other people's views on drug use) as if this is indicative of individual hypocrisy.

Since I didn't do that, I point it out as another lame attempt to create a diversion.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I can deal with it, I just don't buy it.

A poster made a perfectly reasonable criticism of Limbaugh's credibility based on his words and his past behaviour.

Your only response to that is to bring in Obama and make wholesale assumptions about her (and other people's views on drug use) as if this is indicative of individual hypocrisy.

I'm not wasting any more time on you unless you can do better than that.

I brought up Barry because he is an addict, too, but mentioning it doesn't get the kind of favorable mockery for him as it does for Rush. It's undeniably more important that we have a lib druggie as president. I'm sure you enjoyed our last druggie president. The preference to discuss Rush's hypocrisy rather than Barry's strikes me as odd, since Rush can't tax you, fire your CEO or have any influence over Congressional legislation.

It just seems to me that if drug abuse, not the topic of this thread any more than Barry is, is important enough to hijack a thread that simply suggests liberals are too cowardly to listen to conservative talk radio, than an already off track discussion can accomodate rational discourse re Barry's drug abuse, too.

Or, is Rush more important than Barry?

The thread is about Rush. Ergo its not surprising that criticisms of the guy are wheeled out.

You seem to read those criticisms and place undue emphasis on the views of the people posting them.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

The thread isn't about Barry. Its about Rush.

That's where to end the discussion with VW. She doesn't really want to talk about Rush. She wants to talk about her crush, Obama.

And you only want to talk about your crush, GWB. You like to dust off his carass, wave him in front of your opposition like a rodeo clown, and expect them to go off frothing at the mouth about your disrespect. Well, I'm not a Bush fan. I think you must like him more than I do since you think about him more often than I do.

But, I do need to thank you for getting rid of Private Pike for me. Good job! He takes orders well!

Edited April 1, 2009 by Barza Woman

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I can deal with it, I just don't buy it.

A poster made a perfectly reasonable criticism of Limbaugh's credibility based on his words and his past behaviour.

Your only response to that is to bring in Obama and make wholesale assumptions about her (and other people's views on drug use) as if this is indicative of individual hypocrisy.

I'm not wasting any more time on you unless you can do better than that.

I brought up Barry because he is an addict, too, but mentioning it doesn't get the kind of favorable mockery for him as it does for Rush. It's undeniably more important that we have a lib druggie as president. I'm sure you enjoyed our last druggie president. The preference to discuss Rush's hypocrisy rather than Barry's strikes me as odd, since Rush can't tax you, fire your CEO or have any influence over Congressional legislation.

It just seems to me that if drug abuse, not the topic of this thread any more than Barry is, is important enough to hijack a thread that simply suggests liberals are too cowardly to listen to conservative talk radio, than an already off track discussion can accomodate rational discourse re Barry's drug abuse, too.

Or, is Rush more important than Barry?

The thread is about Rush. Ergo its not surprising that criticisms of the guy are wheeled out.

You seem to read those criticisms and place undue emphasis on the views of the people posting them.

Dayum! Spoke too soon

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Your only response to that is to bring in Obama and make wholesale assumptions about her (and other people's views on drug use) as if this is indicative of individual hypocrisy.

Since I didn't do that, I point it out as another lame attempt to create a diversion.

Yep you did.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The thread is about Rush. Ergo its not surprising that criticisms of the guy are wheeled out.

You seem to read those criticisms and place undue emphasis on the views of the people posting them.

Dude, she's just jerking your chain and probably having a good laugh about it. Honestly, just ignore her rants. She teases you into thinking she's going to actually articulate a decent argument, but then throws you on a wild tangent. Same ol', same ol'.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Your only response to that is to bring in Obama and make wholesale assumptions about her (and other people's views on drug use) as if this is indicative of individual hypocrisy.

Since I didn't do that, I point it out as another lame attempt to create a diversion.

Yep you did.

We will agree to disagree about that. It's already been established that you don't see reality the way it is.